New Vendors

Sliss

I second this. Please let us know the status of this. I hope the new vendors are coming soon.

LillyMae_1

With the amount of vendors  i have (30) and keep every one fully stocked, ill be using the old style for sure, as the new way would take up all my storage, on my shard low population, im the only main vendor shop there that offers a vast range of items and about 5 minor vendor shops

Maximus_Neximus

LillyMae_1 said:

With the amount of vendors  i have (30) and keep every one fully stocked, ill be using the old style for sure, as the new way would take up all my storage, on my shard low population, im the only main vendor shop there that offers a vast range of items and about 5 minor vendor shops

The best part is that you can your style of vendor while those of us who would prefer the new vendor can do that!

Maximus_Neximus

Been roughly 6 months now. Hopefully this will be included in the upcoming quality of life publish.

dvvid

I’m looking forward to this because I have high end items to sell but have hardly any gold. 

Maximus_Neximus

Just over 7 months now.

@Kyronix

Any chance you could tell us if this will be included in the next publish?

Kyronix

These are on the radar for this year's series of publishes - which exact one I couldn't tell you yet.

Maximus_Neximus

Kyronix said:

These are on the radar for this year's series of publishes - which exact one I couldn't tell you yet.

Thank you for the update

Tim

Yes thanks for the info.
Will keep stockpiling 

MissE

2. Can we have a vendor that does not charge by the hour?

Yes we can come up with an additional vendor that doesn't charge by the hour but instead takes up house storage and charges a commission percentage only when the item is sold. This type of vendor will be in addition to the original style of vendor.

@Kyronix ;

Sorry for this long post. And further info to the post I initially made.  I am a person who has been running vendor malls for 14 yrs so feel input is really needed on this topic.  @LilyMae_1 is also on the same page as me, another who actually OPERATES on small shards.

This all sounds good however the reasons I run vendors are threefold:

1. It is stuff I have that I no longer need/want obtained either as drops, or gifts, deco items such as excess plants,  marties, deco items, tmaps, mibs, one off drops etc  Rather than throw away I sell to those who may need the item. (I do NOT have the storage space for these items, hence why I wish to sell them)

2. It is resource based stuff used for other people to craft or gather items such as wood, ingots, imbuing ingredients, leather, powder of fort, bod rewards, pick axes etc, bags of sending,  petals, dyes etc, most of which are stacking items so they don't currently take up much storage as I have stacks of the like in my houses, so they go on vendors as a service to others rather than because they take up too much storage. (but now they will take up additional storage on a vendor if I still want to sell them).

3. It is stuff I have crafted that people need to play the game, especially  newbies, spellbooks, runebooks, lrc suits, furniture deeds forges etc most of my vendors have at least 3-10 of each of of these item types for stocking purposes.  Ie: the suit vendor has bags of 6 piece suits etc, so could have 10 suits on it or more so 60+ items just on that vendor.  All these items currently do not take up storage on a vendor so I can supply lots of such and it doesn't matter how  long it takes to sell. (but now they will take up additional storage on a vendor if I still want to sell them).

                ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I KNOW I can still use the existing vendors, (and I will do so)  but the request to have ones not charging by the hour was to combat the fact that on slow small shards the vendor costs KILL off people having vendors as items take a lot longer to sell so the fees make it uneconomical. 

Vendor malls like mine that actually supply LOW end items, but lots of them, will not benefit from a change as proposed above, only those people who have one or two vendors, or those who sell massively high end items also on one or two vendors will benefit as the storage on one off items and one or two vendors is not gonna affect them much.

In my vendor malls/houses I have on Siege (21 vendors) and Oceania (13 vendors).   These are single player owned vendors NOT rental vendors, I do NOT have any rental vendors in my malls.

On my Siege (Coco's) vendors and Oceania (Angelwood's) vendors only 1-2 of the vendors sell higher end items, the rest sell day to day items and I keep them stocked to max levels with all the above type items. Both vendor malls are sitting on pretty much full storage already as to maintain successfully stocked vendors you need to have 'back stock' to resupply them as stuff sells.  Some stuff sells so slowly it means you rarely make much money on them (not NO money you still make a little), and most decent 'profit' comes from the 2-3 higher end vendors.

So for the 1500+ items I have on the vendors, there is probably another 1500 items in back stock.

New vendors that don't charge by the hour are a great idea, but will be of no use to me if they take up storage.  If I wanted to switch to a cheaper option to make it more worthwhile I wouldn't have the room for the stock which defeats the purpose of swapping over. 

I do know that on the shards I operate on my shops are probably up there with or the most used on a consistent basis due mainly to the stocking levels and because I actually stock stuff that others don't bother with due to the lack of profit in them.  I make most profit from 2-3 vendors on both shards, the rest just make a small but consistent profit. 

It is also my playstyle, I am a merchant, I like supplying the basics, being a merchant actually gives me a reason to go out and 'do' stuff.  Without the ability to get rid of excess stuff there is no point to actually getting it in the first place. These new vendors that would take up storage are actually no use to those running operations like mine.  Because my shops are consistent in their items I make a lot of money but it takes a LOT OF WORK to do that, the money I make is earned due to the high level of work put in. And MORE importantly the fact they are always stocked and players KNOW they need a runebook it is there, they need a scroll binder it is there.  High level consistency is the key to any successful mall.

And before people come out and say it is 'not about you' yadda yadda, fine I get it, I understand for the person who only wants one or two vendors to get rid of junk it will be fine.  I am just pointing out how the 'new' proposed vendors will have only a very niche use, and the reasons why I will NOT be swapping over to them if they are structured like the current proposal and the likely impact on merchant operations like mine. 

This type of vendor  will also not work for those who 'rent' vendors as there is no way that a person who owns the house will want all of their storage taken up so that others make more profit and they lose the use of the premises for whatever they want to store.  A standard 18 x 18 can take 66 vendors, if those vendors were fully stocked with this 'new' type of vendor then it would exceed the amount of storage the house actually has (8,250) so it is no use to malls with rental vendors, which is currently how a LOT of vendor outlets operate from what I see.

I agree with @Mervyn on this.  I see it going:

1.  Every house sticks up whatever amount of vendors they can afford the storage on, say 1-2 or 3 and fills them with stuff at ludicrous prices in case they sell as per what Mervyn said.  Or

2. Every house sticks up vendors to get rid of junk they don't want at seriously low end prices which undercuts everyone til there is zero profit at all and they put merchants out of business by stripping any profit out of an item, but as they are not serious merchants it doesn't really worry them as once they 'dump' their cheap item, they will swap to some other cheap item and kill the market on that too.

3. People like me that actually put in hours and hours of work will be so undercut by 2 above we end up just closing down as the day there is zero profit in running vendors will be the day I close down even if It is a play style I enjoy.  I don't work for bugger all.  The ONLY vendors I will then run will be the 2-3 high end vendors on each shard, and my 3 rental high end vendors I keep stocked on Atlanic and I will not bother with the low end stuff at all so you will no longer be able to buy a 100 gps recipe from me on siege or that 5k forge deed on Oceania.  I will switch to 3 storage vendors with high end priced items for a known fee and be done with it. 

This post is mainly to supply information that may be considered when they look at how to 'do' these new vendors. 

Personally,  I think a sliding scale of daily fee would be better and simpler, so those selling low end items get it cheaper yet the fee for high end items remains as is.

Items up to 20k value could actually incur NO fee, with a sliding scale 1-5% (or whatever the current fee is) applying after that .  Items under 20k would account for most crafted  and newbie items and allow those low profit items to be sold without sending the trader broke on fees.

Just tossing the above out there for consideration.  Serious merchants currently make money from the existing vendor system.  It is a fine balancing act moderated by the market but making it so that anyone can toss up a vendor for the cost of 125 items storage has the potential to be disastrous.

Ezekiel_Zane

Simple solution is to leave vendors mostly the way they currently are and just change the daily/hourly fee to a one-time fee paid when the item sells.  It's a sales tax.  Who in the world isn't already accustomed to paying sales tax?  Seriously!  It's that simple of a fix.

1) leave vendors as they are and do not count towards house storage limits.
2) remove the daily/hourly fee
3) charge a sales tax when an item sells.
4) I propose a 5% sales tax, paid by the buyer which goes into the city treasury or something.

MissE

Ezekiel_Zane said:

Simple solution is to leave vendors mostly the way they currently are and just change the daily/hourly fee to a one-time fee paid when the item sells.  It's a sales tax.  Who in the world isn't already accustomed to paying sales tax?  Seriously!  It's that simple of a fix.

1) leave vendors as they are and do not count towards house storage limits.
2) remove the daily/hourly fee
3) charge a sales tax when an item sells.
4) I propose a 5% sales tax, paid by the buyer which goes into the city treasury or something.

The problem with that scenario and why they won't do it  is that is the quickest way to get people using the vendors for storage.  They put items on the vendor for ludicrous amounts, so a runebook for 10m or whatever, if it sells they make an absolute killing so it doesn't matter, but when they want to 'use' the runebook they just take it off the vendor and end up paying no fees.

It is why they took it to hourly fees, rather than daily fees in the first place, as some unscrupulous vendors were putting their high end items on a vendor and 'before the time' of the daily fee was calculated they took the items off, then restocked them after the fee was taken. It used to happen once a day on atlantic on the super high end stuff so that they didn't pay fees on em.

I think the fees as are are fine, they just need to change it so that items of really low end value pay no fee as I suggested above. So if I wanna sell a spellbook for 20k or under or I don't pay a fee on it,but if I want to sell a super high end invasion spellbook for 20 million I do.  Just get the scale right and make sure it is clearly posted.

Sliss

@ Kyronix 

Sorry for this long post.

Oh Boy, this is not a long post. This a very long post

I understand for the person who only wants one or two vendors to get rid of junk it will be fine.  I am just pointing out how the 'new' proposed vendors will have only a very niche use,

Respectfully, those people running one or two vendors are the majority. The niche are the mega-mall owners like you. TBH, I think you are mistaken in thinking that the new vendors will be of no use to you. But even it it's the case, I think far from being niche, I expect them to revitalize economies of smaller shards and undo some of the damage done by shard shield. Let me repeat that - if the plain sails tax (with a reasonable fee) vendors are implemented, I would expect to see a dramatic positive effect on less populated shards, an effect that would boost population among other things.

This type of vendor  will also not work for those who 'rent' vendors as there is no way that a person who owns the house will want all of their storage taken up so that others make more profit and they lose the use of the premises for whatever they want to store. 

There is really no need to rent vendors with the vendor search. And if someone still feels so inclined, existing vendors are still there for that purpose.

I agree with @ Mervyn on this.  I see it going:

1.  Every house sticks up whatever amount of vendors they can afford the storage on, say 1-2 or 3 and fills them with stuff at ludicrous prices in case they sell as per what Mervyn said. 

This was addressed at the time Mervin said it. Why would they do it? The item count is shared with the house, so there is no incentive to put anything on the vendor unless you are selling it.

Or

2. Every house sticks up vendors to get rid of junk they don't want at seriously low end prices which undercuts everyone til there is zero profit at all and they put merchants out of business by stripping any profit out of an item, but as they are not serious merchants it doesn't really worry them as once they 'dump' their cheap item, they will swap to some other cheap item and kill the market on that too.

This is capitalism, and this is as it should be. If someone is dumping merchandise, nothing is stopping you at buying it and re-listing it at market prices. This is especially easy with the vendor search now. Moreover, nothing is stopping these people form undercutting you now with the existing vendors.

Personally,  I think a sliding scale of daily fee would be better and simpler, so those selling low end items get it cheaper yet the fee for high end items remains as is.

Items up to 20k value could actually incur NO fee, with a sliding scale 1-5% (or whatever the current fee is) applying after that .  Items under 20k would account for most crafted  and newbie items and allow those low profit items to be sold without sending the trader broke on fees.

Just tossing the above out there for consideration. 

While such system might benefit you, it will have little to no effect on revitalizing commerce on small shards. Trading on a shard like Pacific happens in three places: GenChat, Forums, and Atlantic. Where it does not happen is Pacific vendors. And this situation drives players away.

Serious merchants currently make money from the existing vendor system.  It is a fine balancing act moderated by the market but making it so that anyone can toss up a vendor for the cost of 125 items storage has the potential to be disastrous.

Yes you may need to adapt to the new realities. That's what business people do, and no doubt what you had to do in the past in response to changing conditions. Moreover, I think the new vendors ultimately will benefit professional traders like yourself even more that the average player.

Pawain

Are we debating whether we should get a new type vendor?

Please give us new vendor options!!!

MissE

I don't care what they do.  I will continue to use vendors as they are.  If the change makes it unprofitable then it is a case of me just closing, don't care about that either.  All the stuff I would of sold at a shop will go in the bin, no skin off my nose. I won't bother supply basics as I do now, I will as I said ...........  just close.   I can make just as much money if I  'sell only high end items on Atlantic bandwagon' with much less work.

A lot of people have a lot of comment yet they have no experience running vendors over LONG periods.  Take my comments as you like, I have been running vendors as my main occupation since I started playing 16 yrs ago so I do have some knowledge.  I do NOT deal in rares, or EM items or all high end goods, I deal in every day usables on small shards.  The ONLY way to make money running vendors on small shards like this is by being consistent, believe me or not, don't care about that either.  My feedback is just that ......... feedback, don't bother arguing points with me.

It won't matter what type of vendors you have, expensive stuff will still be shipped to Atlantic as you will always get more buyers with more money and better prices.  Vendor fees or not will make diddly squats worth of difference to this scenario. On Oceania I already 'try' to sell high end items to give the players some options, but due to the lack of players I generally vend them for 1-2 weeks first on Oceania, and when they don't sell, ship em to Atlantic where the same item will sell for MORE than I was selling it on Oce within days.  It is all to do with the amount of customers and the amount of money. I doubt any more vendors with or without fees will make much difference.

And respectfully,  those people running one or two vendors may be the 'majority' but most are like pop up restaurants that trade for a month or so then fold.  They set them up and have 50 things to sell then find that to continue trading they actually need to work at it.  It is NOT due to fees it is due to the fact you have to work to build up business, continually be restocking (daily not just when you feel like it), always offer a standard stocking range and level and  always be consistent with your pricing.  That is effort most people don't want to put in. 

Pawain

I dont have a castle I dont have a Luna house. My house is still named for rune dropping.  Many of these vendors have been there the whole time.  I welcome any new vendor relations or contracts.  Mine want to be seen.  They deserve more options!

Arron

Skett said:

How about a scaling fee any thing 1 mil and under 10% 1 mil to 25 mil 15% 25mil to 50 mil 20% 50 mil plus 25% 100mil and above 35% cap 

and if an item sits on a vendor for more than 45 days it gets hit with the percentage fee and will again in anther 45 days this will stop people from just storing “junk” on them so can we now stop with the lame storage idea already 

okay I just tossed those numbers out there with out much thought to make a point (kinda of like everything I post) 

That seems like too high a percentage to pay to vendors. I don't want to make 100 million and have to give 35 million to the vendor as a fee. I think a flat fee is better, after all we have vendors to make money to get the items we need. Also why would I or anyone store stuff on a vendor if it takes the lockdowns from my home to store it. Seems like extra effort.That is however my opinion.

DJAd

cobb said:

I hope this doesn't turn into an empty promise like the revamping of the account management page.

boom.

FinleyGrant

Lol when I see some of the comments I would not wonder when they give up and do nothing.

Iam actually surprised why so many people are against that. 

No one said the old vendors will go.
The idea was to make a second type of vendor which uses house storage plus a small selling tax.

It will allow people to choose which vendor they want or fit better for the shard and item planned to sell. 

However some ppl obviously don't understand that they have a choice.

I personally like the idea

Bilbo

Well said @FinleyGrant

Tanda

I have done the vendor thing from 60 self run vendors down to just a couple, it's a lot of effort to maintain stock. The one thing I'd like to point out is WHEN a shard gets to the point where NO ONE wants to stock basics or can make a profit, and as population drops on a shard losing vendors is just another nail in the coffin for that shard. It gets very difficult to consider moving to a new shard when one has to be old enough for shard shields or pay transfer fees to import the equipment needed. When you can't even buy a full spellbook or a city rune book it makes the process a much much longer struggle. 

Tanager

A bit late, I suppose, but just tossing my 2 cents in...

Most shards these days are low population. When some one new does come visiting, the shard can look depressingly dead because they don't have anything on VS that is high or low end. Just the consumables. Imagine a city with nothing but gas stations and grocery stores. No fancy deco items to get you motivated to put down roots, no uber gear to covet and motivate you to level your character. It can often appear, on the surface, that no one does any of the things to get these items. There is nothing to warrant a closer look. They move on.

This new style of vendor seems wonderful to me. A set fee, so all manner of items can be available to everyone at all times. High end deco that is not in high demand but is still valuable. Low end noob stuff that is not stocked cuz it consumes far more in fees than its value. Taking up house storage limit is needed, otherwise the community hoarders will just turn it into the same thing as vendor BOD storage - except they would be bogging down vendor search.

Even if they make these vendors obtainable only via the Store, and even if the fee is something ridiculous like 50% - it is still, imo, a greatly needed option.

psycho

I agree with Finley Grant comment and Tanager comment.

I welcome the new vendor type. It will be a blessing to lower pop shards.

Remember the old vendor type will also still be availiable so it gives people a choice.

I suggest the new vendor type fee to be set at approx 5%

then lowered further if the owner buys a mercant trinket from the UOstore at his choice.

(they need to be updated with the new vendortype btw)

Maximus_Neximus

Tanager said:

Even if they make these vendors obtainable only via the Store, and even if the fee is something ridiculous like 50% - it is still, imo, a greatly needed option.

Absolutely not. If that’s the case it’d be a waste of developer time and ours as well. 

The fee needs to be reasonable or it won’t be used. Why would I so something with a 50% fee when I can spam in chat or post on forums and pay no fee?

Bilbo

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

Sliss

Maximus_Neximus said:

Tanager said:

Even if they make these vendors obtainable only via the Store, and even if the fee is something ridiculous like 50% - it is still, imo, a greatly needed option.

Absolutely not. If that’s the case it’d be a waste of developer time and ours as well. 

The fee needs to be reasonable or it won’t be used. Why would I so something with a 50% fee when I can spam in chat or post on forums and pay no fee?

Exactly! Unreasonable fees (and anything much beyond what you pay in your local supermarket is unreasonable) accomplish two things: 1) Cheap stuff like things needed by newbies stops getting sold altogether; 2) High demand stuff moves to the forums or even worse - RMT.

Tim

Why a fee anyway? You'r paying for the vendor with house storage. To the people without 3 or more accounts thats much more valuable than gold.
  

Tanager

My statement was worse case scenario. Even at those insane stats (which I stated as being ridiculous), I would still use it for certain things and everything else would just continue as it is now. For the record, however, yes - a reasonable cost and a reasonable fee would of course be better.

If I put something very cheap on the vendor, like a full spellbook or a basic LRC suit for newcomers, it can sit there and consume FAR MORE than 50% of its price before it sells. Most sellers on low population shards who stock those items do so at a loss, as a community service. Yet not having those basic things readily available makes the shard look deader than it is. So my point was that even at worse case, it would still be a welcome addition. Of course, I do hope for better than that.

Maximus_Neximus

Roughly 9 1/2 months now.

I know it's "on the radar", but I'm really hoping it'll sneak into the upcoming publish.

Uriah_Heep

If it's a store item for cash, or if its fees are ridiculous, it will be a non starter.   Might as well save the dev time.